Lawrence Thomas Daughtrey, Jr. v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 24th District Court of Victoria County

Annotate this Case
NUMBER 13-06-00418-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

_________________________________________________________

 

LAWRENCE THOMAS DAUGHTREY, JR., APPELLANT,

 
v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE.

_______________________________________________________

 
On Appeal from the 24th District Court
of Victoria County, Texas.

_______________________________________________________

 
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Benavides

Memorandum Opiniomn Per Curiam

 

Appellant, Lawrence Daughtrey, attempts to appeal a conviction for aggravated assault. The trial court has certified that "the defendant has waived the right of appeal." See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2).

On July 27, 2006, this Court notified appellant's counsel of the trial court's certification and ordered counsel to: (1) review the record; (2) determine whether appellant has a right to appeal; and (3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel's findings as to whether appellant has a right to appeal, or, alternatively, advise this Court as to the existence of any amended certification.

On October 11, 2007, counsel filed a letter brief with this Court. Counsel's response does not establish (1) that the certification currently on file with this Court is incorrect or (2) that appellant otherwise has a right to appeal.

The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an appeal must be dismissed if the trial court's certification does not show that the defendant has the right of appeal. Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d); see Tex. R. App. P. 37.1, 44.3, 44.4. Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED. Any pending motions in this cause are denied as moot. The companion appeal, Cause No. 13-06-417-CR, remains pending in this Court.

 

PER CURIAM

 

Do not publish. See Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

 

Memorandum Opinion delivered

and filed this the 15th day of November, 2007.

 

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.